Goodbye Religious Freedom

[Shogun]

Again, the court disagrees with you. I wonder who has more legal expertise?

the STATE court disagrees. I wonder if this will be the first time a STATE court is overturned by a FEDERAL court.

 

[Inferno]

You are generalizing, dude. Feel free to take that intellectually lazy path if you like.. but it leads down a less than convincing destination. Im including myself in the group that is willing to consider more than knee-jerk naivety when considering whose rights were actually being shit upon here. Do YOU know what the supremacy clause is? Can YOU find any place in our government documents that remotely suggests that a woman, gay or strait, has a RIGHT to pregnancy?


welcome to the club, by the way.

No there is nothing like a pregnancy right. There is a right not to be discriminated agaunst though.

 

[Shogun]

No there is nothing like a pregnancy right. There is a right not to be discriminated agaunst though.

One more time. Sexual orientation is NOT a federally protected status. And, state laws regarding such do not trump the FEDERAL first amendment.

 

[Care4all]

It's debatable whether certain churches are non profit.

One good thing about this case is that it makes it clear to doctors and future doctors that if you are planning on discriminating against certain would be patients because of some belief you claim is religious and therefore sacrosanct and above the rule of law you had better find another profession.

Doctors know well ahead of time before they pay tuition that they will have to comply with licensing rules if they want to practice medicine in this country. This case has improved consumer protections from unethical and abusive doctors as well as demonstrating that discrimination and injustice will be not tolerated in America.

anguille, there is NO licensing rule that says doctors must operate on ANY PATIENT that is having an elective surgery...these doctors can turn down any hetero couple too, if they deemed so....

the doctors WERE NOT TOLD when they paid for their schooling that the government would have the right to force them to go against their conscientious religious objections...THIS IS COMING AFTER THE FACT.....

The Civil rights amendment DOES NOT protect sexual orientation, and if it did it still does not give ANY RIGHT to any patient seeking an elective surgery...

it protects people from being discriminated against in hiring, (equal opportunity), and in public facilities, public schools, and in private establishments of hotels, restaurants, and the likes of these....but those protected under gender, race, religion etc...does not include sexual orientation...unless it was amended somewhere down the road that i missed when i just looked the Civil rights amendment up....

though i did just see shoggie post something about California having this law...so i guess it will be up to the supreme court if it gets there...to decide if california's law trumps the federal first amendment.

and as i said, i disagree with the religious "thinking" of these doctor dudes, but i do believe they have the first amendment in the Bill of Rights, on their side....and that is the only thing that matters to me at this time....

 

[Anguille]

anguille, there is NO licensing rule that says doctors must operate on ANY PATIENT that is having an elective surgery...these doctors can turn down any hetero couple too, if they deemed so....

the doctors WERE NOT TOLD when they paid for their schooling that the government would have the right to force them to go against their conscionable religious objections...THIS IS COMING AFTER THE FACT.....

The Civil rights amendment DOES NOT protect sexual orientation, and if it did it still does not give ANY RIGHT to any patient seeking an elective surgery...

it protects people from being discriminated against in hiring, (equal opportunity), and in public facilities, public schools, and in private establishments of hotels, restaurants, and the likes of these....but those protected under gender, race, religion etc...does not include sexual orientation...unless it was amended somewhere down the road that i missed when i just looked the Civil rights amendment up....

though i did just see shoggie post something about California having this law...so i guess it will be up to the supreme court if it gets there...to decide if california's law trumps the federal first amendment.

and as i said, i disagree with the religious "thinking" of these doctor dudes, but i do believe they have the first amendment in the Bill of Rights, on their side....and that is the only thing that matters to me at this time....

I'm pretty sure the medical board requires doctors to behave in an ethical manner if they wish to have a license to practice medicine and these doctors have not behaved ethically.
I don't see how in what way the 1st Amendment grants permission for people to impose their religious beliefs on other people as these doctors attempted to do. I think to interpret it as such goes against the concept of freedom for all in as much a capacity as society can allow. I think the 1st Amendment protects people from being oppressed by religious ideas they don't subscribe to, such as it's okay to discriminate against people for being different than you are or for not having the same religious beliefs as you do. Obviously, I am not a scholar of constitutional law but I think the the Constitution was created and amended to with the aim to define and protect human rights. And one of those rights is the right to be treated equally and fairly. If doctors are granted permission to practice medicine, they must respect the concept of equality for all, not just for people who think like them.

Someone asked earlier in the thread if people thought it would be okay for doctors with religious convictions against providing medical services to blacks to go ahead and refuse to service blacks. The "elective surgery" thing has been tossed about as if it had some bearing on the case, which it does not. You can't refuse to serve food to people, rent or sell houses to people, deny carnival rides to people or perform medical services which you offer to the public just because you think you are on a mission from God and God told you to go ahead and act out your bigoted ideas. Anyone is free to express, within reason, their bigoted ideas but that's it. In this country, discrimination is not permitted. That's what I read in the Constitution.

 

[Anguille]

One more time. Sexual orientation is NOT a federally protected status. And, state laws regarding such do not trump the FEDERAL first amendment.

We shall see, Oliver Wendell Holmes.

 

[Ravi]

No there is nothing like a pregnancy right. There is a right not to be discriminated agaunst though.

Someone please explain this to me...are you guys trying to say that a woman has no right to get pregnant? I'm not talking get pregnant by AI, but get pregnant, period.

What next? What other basic biological functions is the government going to be allowed to control?

 

[Glori.B]

maybe ob/gyn doctors should be allowed to designate in their credentialing that they only offer natural birth services, or not...as long as the government does not prohibit ob/gyn doctors from their freedom to practice artificial insemination or abortion, and likewise not prohibit them to opt out of offering those services, there is no harm...both could be protected under the law...think of it as a conscientious objection...this concept can not be universally applied when it comes to discrimination, but it works in the case of reproductive medicine.

 

[dilloduck]

maybe ob/gyn doctors should be allowed to designate in their credentialing that they only offer natural birth services, or not...as long as the government does not prohibit ob/gyn doctors from their freedom to practice artificial insemination or abortion, and likewise not prohibit them to opt out of offering those services, there is no harm...both could be protected under the law...think of it as a conscientious objection...this concept can not be universally applied when it comes to discrimination, but it works in the case of reproductive medicine.

Excellant idea !

 

[Shogun]

Someone please explain this to me...are you guys trying to say that a woman has no right to get pregnant? I'm not talking get pregnant by AI, but get pregnant, period.

What next? What other basic biological functions is the government going to be allowed to control?

if you are without a man to get you pregnant there is no federal or state right that you are able to get pregnant. Had these lesbians decided to bite the bullet and get fucked by a dude like everyone else this would be a non issue.

 

[AllieBaba]

I'm pretty sure the medical board requires doctors to behave in an ethical manner if they wish to have a license to practice medicine and these doctors have not behaved ethically.
I don't see how in what way the 1st Amendment grants permission for people to impose their religious beliefs on other people as these doctors attempted to do. I think to interpret it as such goes against the concept of freedom for all in as much a capacity as society can allow. I think the 1st Amendment protects people from being oppressed by religious ideas they don't subscribe to, such as it's okay to discriminate against people for being different than you are or for not having the same religious beliefs as you do. Obviously, I am not a scholar of constitutional law but I think the the Constitution was created and amended to with the aim to define and protect human rights. And one of those rights is the right to be treated equally and fairly. If doctors are granted permission to practice medicine, they must respect the concept of equality for all, not just for people who think like them.

Someone asked earlier in the thread if people thought it would be okay for doctors with religious convictions against providing medical services to blacks to go ahead and refuse to service blacks. The "elective surgery" thing has been tossed about as if it had some bearing on the case, which it does not. You can't refuse to serve food to people, rent or sell houses to people, deny carnival rides to people or perform medical services which you offer to the public just because you think you are on a mission from God and God told you to go ahead and act out your bigoted ideas. Anyone is free to express, within reason, their bigoted ideas but that's it. In this country, discrimination is not permitted. That's what I read in the Constitution.

There is nothing unethical when you are dealing with adoptions and any elective surgery or procedure to USE YOUR JUDGMENT. A doctor may judge that a 16 year old girl is not a good candidate for breast augmentation, not because she's physically unable to bear the surgery, but because HE DOESN'T THINK SHE NEEDS IT. The same with artificial insemination. If the doctor doesn't feel comfortable in helping create a child to put into a situation he does not think will be best for the child, it's his call.

You don't get to force the doctors to do your experiments, that went out with the Nazi concentration camps. Remember those? That's what happens when the GOVERNMENT tells doctors what they must do, regardless of their own morality.

 

[AllieBaba]

Someone please explain this to me...are you guys trying to say that a woman has no right to get pregnant? I'm not talking get pregnant by AI, but get pregnant, period.

What next? What other basic biological functions is the government going to be allowed to control?

What we're saying is nobody has the right to force doctors to perform procedures they find morally repugnant.

 

[midcan5]

Amazing that this thread continues its excuses for what is simply discrimination against an American citizen who lives under the same constitution as the rest of us. The wingnuts argue everyone should be armed and dangerous but when it comes to taking care of their medical request their rights change! 7-0 is pretty clear for most.

 

[AllieBaba]

No, the wingnuts argue that we all have the right to make our own decisions..whether that means deciding to maintain a gun, or the right to follow our own moral code when performing elective surgery.

 

[Glori.B]

Amazing that this thread continues its excuses for what is simply discrimination against an American citizen who lives under the same constitution as the rest of us.

isn't the ob/gyn doctor an american citizen as well?

 

[AllieBaba]

Ve must control za doktors!

You don't get to force people to perform medical procedures they find morally reprehensible, bubba. Ain't gonna happen.

 

[Shogun]

Amazing that this thread continues its excuses for what is simply discrimination against an American citizen who lives under the same constitution as the rest of us. The wingnuts argue everyone should be armed and dangerous but when it comes to taking care of their medical request their rights change! 7-0 is pretty clear for most.

nice strawman with the gun issue. You really do my side of the polical line lots of utility when making stupid emotional statements.


7-0 in a state court doesn't mean shit when this case is taken to the supreme court given that the first amendment rights of the doctors have been violated by a state courts decision. I'll ask YOU since you want to throw a tantrum: SHOW ME WHERE a woman has the RIGHT to get pregnant in any document state or federal. SHOW ME WHERE the state has any precedence to put this fabricated "right" above a federally explicit right.


here.. just a taste of why your little rant is about as impressive as anything Ravi has posted in the last 3 fucking months..


Breeder Reaction

 

[dilloduck]

Amazing that this thread continues its excuses for what is simply discrimination against an American citizen who lives under the same constitution as the rest of us. The wingnuts argue everyone should be armed and dangerous but when it comes to taking care of their medical request their rights change! 7-0 is pretty clear for most.

What you think is discrimination is what others would call the freedom of choice. Now women want the freedom of choice over their bodies AND the freedom to order every doctor how to properly practice their profession?

 

[WhiteLion]

Communist Totalinarism at the doorsteps, YOU WILL DO AS YOUR TOLD!!!!!!!!